I'm warming to the idea of dotdot as a sentence-separator. Visual as well
as logical.
It would be an estimable anti-strabismus device for instructing newbies.
You could chain dotdot for emphasis:
foo=:3 :'(0 0 $ 1!:2&2)2 1$y;z=.(#~((+.)(1:|.(> </\)))@('' ''&~:))y
............z'
empty foo ' the quick brown fix ; '
as you can with right-bracket:
foo=:3 :'z[[[[[[[[[[ (0 0 $ 1!:2&2)2 1$y;z=.(#~((+.)(1:|.(> </\)))@(''
''&~:))y'
And for those preferring (>::) -- there's nothing stopping us having more
than one sentence-separator.
Would dotdot terminate a comment? Inline comments would be nice to have.
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 03:04, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming <
[email protected]> wrote:
> from my extensions at https://github.com/Pascal-J/jpp
>
> I use cut on ` for "everything" replacing any native ` with named
> conjunctions that build gerunds with a more complete spec.
>
> as many of you know, you can build a multiline sentence with a a list of
> boxed strings.
>
> bb =: 1 : 'dltb each (''`''&cut) m'
>
> 'a =. x+y ` +: a' bb (4 : )
>
> 4 : 0
>
> a =. x+y
>
> +: a
>
> )
>
>
> in jpp, quotes aren't needed and extra builtins simplify function
> creation. so above is created and called as
>
>
> 2 (a =. x+y ` +: a bb. 4.. ]3
> 10
>
>
> between ... and >:: , I prefer ... for being easier to type, standing out
> more, and the inherent nature that it is simply a cut mark.
>
>
>
> On Monday, July 26, 2021, 09:19:04 p.m. EDT, Henry Rich <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> I don't see much downside to implementing a sentence delimiter, except
> for a nagging feeling that the good Lord left that space for you to put
> commentary in.
>
> Take a moment to consider what is the best delimiter. I prefer >:: to
> .. or ... because it shows the left-to-right order.
>
> Henry Rich
>
> On 7/26/2021 10:44 AM, 'Michael Day' via Programming wrote:
> > APL lives/d with the diamond separator, which works from left to
> > right, in addition to
> > left tack and right tack (in Dyalog anyway) which are similar to J's
> > [ and ] .
> >
> > So this modification might help recruit any APL-ers still averse to or
> > unaware of J.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On 26/07/2021 14:47, Eric Iverson wrote:
> >> Michal,
> >> I slightly favor having a statement separator. Others are violently
> >> opposed. You have started an interesting discussion that might take a
> >> while
> >> to pick up steam. Don't give up yet!
> >>
> >> There are some complicating issues, such as debug.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 4:57 AM Michal Wallace
> >> <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Come on... :) Obviously I know how to write the code I wrote. :D
> >>> Yes, I can write the whole thing like this:
> >>>
> >>> puts@']' fgc@9 puts 4 {. s=.1|.s [ fgc@15 puts@'[' goxy xy [ bgc 4 [
> >>> fgc 9
> >>>
> >>> I'm just saying it looks backwards and awkward to me.
> >>>
> >>> This thing draws a string on the screen that looks like [.oOo] in
> >>> various colors, and the .oOo part is extracted from a larger string
> >>> so it looks like a little indicator that the machine is still doing
> >>> something
> >>> or waiting for you to do something. (Or rather, this draws one frame
> >>> of the
> >>> animation)
> >>>
> >>> If I were putting that string together without setting the colors and
> >>> moving the cursor, i'd write:
> >>>
> >>> echo '[', (s=.1|.s), ']'
> >>>
> >>> But with the color and cursor stuff, I seem to have to break it into
> >>> multiple lines, or write it backwards.
> >>>
> >>> In this particular case, what I plan to do instead is write a little
> >>> language that lets me set colors
> >>> and move the cursor in the natural order, so it's not a big deal...
> >>> (Maybe
> >>> for J, i'll just make a
> >>> "left-to-right" verb that operates on gerunds or something...)
> >>>
> >>> But... lately, I've also been working on some parser combinators, and a
> >>> small virtual machine.
> >>> In all these cases, I have bits and pieces of the code which are more
> >>> naturally expressed as
> >>> sequences of imperative operations, rather than function
> >>> compositions, and
> >>> I find myself
> >>> wanting this same statement separator.
> >>>
> >>> I use K every day at work, and it uses the semicolon for this
> >>> purpose. I
> >>> often find myself wishing K
> >>> had forks, and J had statement separators. (and native dictionaries,
> >>> and a
> >>> literal syntax for symbols.. :))
> >>>
> >>> Anyway, I noticed '..' was free now and it seems to have a nice
> >>> symmetry
> >>> with '{{' and '}}'
> >>> and I thought it might be a good notation for this.
> >>>
> >>> I don't really expect this proposal to make it into the language
> >>> (for one
> >>> thing, it's not clear to me that
> >>> there's an actual process by which language decisions get made),
> >>> but... I
> >>> also didn't expect we'd
> >>> ever get anything like {{ and }} (which I've also wanted forever),
> >>> so I'm
> >>> asking.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 9:45 PM 'robert therriault' via Programming <
> >>> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi Michal,
> >>>>
> >>>> In your first line you are already doing what I would do, which is
> >>>> to use
> >>>> [ to separate the different results.
> >>>>
> >>>> goxy xy [ bgc 4 [ fgc 9
> >>>>
> >>>> You can continue to do that as long as you get the order right and
> >>>> lower
> >>>> things vertically would precede the upper ones
> >>>>
> >>>> fgc 15 [ puts '[' [ goxy xy [ bgc 4 [ fgc 9
> >>>>
> >>>> or perhaps I am misunderstanding what you are trying to do.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers, bob
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Jul 25, 2021, at 17:00, Michal Wallace <[email protected]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> I love the new '{{' and '}}' ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> what are the chances we could bring '..' back as a statement
> >>>>> separator,
> >>>> at
> >>>>> least inside these new double curly braces?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Often I have a bunch of really short lines that I would love to just
> >>>> stick
> >>>>> on one line, like this demo code from the terminal library I'm
> >>>>> working
> >>>> on:
> >>>>> while. -. keyp'' do.
> >>>>> goxy xy [ bgc 4 [ fgc 9
> >>>>> puts '['
> >>>>> fgc 15
> >>>>> puts 4{. s=.1|.s
> >>>>> fgc 9
> >>>>> puts']'
> >>>>> sleep 150
> >>>>> end.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I can easily stick these on one line with @ or [: but the code
> >>>>> winds up
> >>>>> feeling very backward, so I find myself just using newlines and
> >>> wasting a
> >>>>> lot of vertical space on my screen.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> One answer here is to make a mini-language for terminal operations
> >>> that I
> >>>>> can just pass as a string, but there are other places where I find
> >>> myself
> >>>>> wishing I could just write a sequence of expressions (evaluated
> >>>>> right-to-left as usual) but all on one line, and sequence them from
> >>> left
> >>>> to
> >>>>> right... (I use K at work, and this is a pretty natural style)
> >>>>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For information about J forums see
> >>>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> For information about J forums see
> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>>>
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
